Translate

Thursday, April 11, 2013

THE DAY 69 CHILDREN DIED BY DRONE ATTACK

RECENTLY WE HAD WHAT THE MEDIA CALLED A "MASSACRE" AT SANDY HOOK ELEMENTARY IN CONNECTICUT...
20 CHILDREN WERE SUPPOSEDLY KILLED BY A "LONE GUNMAN" AND THE NATION WEPT, THE PRESIDENT CRIED ON NATIONAL TV...

HALF OF AMERICA DECIDED WE SHOULD BAN ASSAULT WEAPONS, MAYBE ALL GUNS.
PEOPLE WERE OUTRAGED THAT GUNS HAD KILLED AGAIN.

BUT ON OCTOBER 30, 2006, THERE WAS A DRONE ATTACK AT A KNOWN SCHOOL IN PAKISTAN.
THE "TARGET" WAS ONE LONE SCHOOL TEACHER, BUT 69 YOUNG PAKISTANI CHILDREN WERE IN THAT SCHOOL WITH HIM, AND AMERICA KNEW THAT, THEY KNEW THEY WERE HITTING A SCHOOL WHERE STUDENTS WERE ATTENDING!

69 CHILDREN DIED IN JUST ONE DAY, FROM ONE PUSHED BUTTON ON A REMOTE-CONTROLLED AMERICAN DRONE!

GEORGE BUSH #2 NEVER WEPT ABOUT THAT.

THE AMERICAN MAINSTREAM MEDIA BARELY GAVE IT A PASSING MENTION.

THE AMERICAN PUBLIC NEVER CRIED OVER THOSE 69 CHILDREN, AND BECAUSE SO FEW NEWSPAPERS OR TELEVISION STATIONS MENTIONED THE INCIDENT, MOST AMERICANS WILL EVEN NOW DENY IT HAPPENED, BUT IT DID HAPPEN, AND NO ONE WEPT, AND NO ONE CALLED FOR A BAN ON A "WEAPON OF MASS DESTRUCTION".

THE U.N. IMPOSED NO SANCTIONS ON THE U.S. FOR THIS 'CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY'.

NO ONE IN AMERICA SEEMED OUTRAGED THAT AMERICA WAS HITTING TARGETS INSIDE PAKISTAN, A NATION WE WERE NOT "AT WAR" WITH, OR THAT INNOCENTS WERE THE REAL TARGETS, THE KNOWN TARGETS.

IT WAS JUST ANOTHER DAY.
69 CHILDREN WERE WIPED OFF THE EARTH WITHIN SECONDS, AND NO ONE IN AMERICA CRIED... NO ONE SCREAMED, "BAN THE DRONES!"

DON'T TELL ME THESE IMAGES ARE DISTURBING, NOR THINK THAT I SHOULDN'T POST SUCH 'GRISLY' SCENES!
LOOK AT THESE CHILDREN!

THEY HAVE NAMES, THEY HAD LIVES, BUT THEY WILL NEVER GROW UP!

THEIR PARENTS LOVED THEM, JUST AS WE LOVE OUR CHILDREN, AND THEIR HEARTS WERE BROKEN TO SEE THESE SMALL SHATTERED BODIES THAT, MOMENTS BEFORE, HAD BEEN SO FULL OF LIFE.

WHAT WOULD YOU DO IF THESE WERE YOUR CHILDREN?WOULD YOU EVER REST UNTIL THOSE GUILTY OF THEIR MURDERS HAD BEEN BROUGHT TO JUSTICE? WOULD YOU EVER CEASE SCREAMING THAT YOUR CHILDREN HAD BEEN TARGETED FOR A KILL?WOULD YOU "FORGIVE AND FORGET" AND "GO ON WITH LIFE"?WOULD YOU NEVER ONCE SEEK REVENGE ON YOUR OWN?WOULD YOU AGREE THAT IT WAS "JUST AN UNFORTUNATE ACCIDENT"?

READ, PLEASE!
READ THEIR STORY AND THEIR NAMES, AND REMEMBER THESE FACES!
THEY ARE NOT THE VICTIMS OF 'JUST' A 2006 ATTACK IN THE "WAR ON TERROR", BUT THEY ARE VICTIMS OF A SENSELESS UNDECLARED WAR INSIDE NATIONS WHOSE PEOPLE WERE NEVER, NEVER INVOLVED IN THE 9/11 ATTACK!

UNDERSTAND, PLEASE, THAT NO NATION WE CURRENTLY HAVE TROOPS DEPLOYED IN WAS IN ANY WAY IMPLICATED IN THE 9/11 ATTACK...NOT IRAQ, NOT AFGHANISTAN, NOT YEMEN, NOT SOMALIA, NOT PAKISTAN!

"It is one of the worst incidents of the entire drones campaign, yet one of the least reported. A CIA strike on a madrassa or religious school in 2006 killed up to 69 children, among 80 civilians.

The attack was on a religious seminary in Chenegai, in Bajaur Agency."
THE ATTACK I AM CALLING ATTENTION TO HERE WAS IN 2006, BUT OTHERS HAVE CERTAINLY KILLED CHILDREN SINCE THEN, AND AMERICA SOMETIMES PAYS FOR THESE LIVE, PAYS A PITTANCE, A FEW THOUSAND DOLLARS FOR THE LIFE OF A CHILD.

"CIA drones attacked on October 30, 2006, flattening much of the school. Their target was reportedly the headmaster, a known militant.
According to some reports, there was also a token late contribution to the assault by Pakistani military helicopters.

But dozens of children were also killed, the youngest aged seven.
Veteran journalist Rahimullah Yusufzai, speaking to the Bureau of Investigative Journalism from Peshawar, recalls visiting the village just after the strike:
“People were devastated. I met with a father who had lost two children."

Initially the Pakistan Army claimed that it had carried out the bombardment, even as shops and offices closed across the region and protests spread.

But as the scale of the attack unfolded, the story changed.
The Sunday Times carried a report from a key aide to then-President Pervez Musharraf stating: ‘We thought it would be less damaging if we said we did it rather than the US. But there was a lot of collateral damage and we’ve requested the Americans not to do it again.’

A week after the attack, a local English newspaper published the names and home villages of 80 victims. Sixty-nine were reported as children aged 17 or under. According to the paper’s sources, It was claimed that ‘one of the deceased was only seven-year old, three were eight, three nine, one was 10, four were 11, four were 12, eight were 13, six were 14, nine were 15, 19 were 16, 12 were 17, three were 18, three were 19 and only two were 21-years old’."

"These children were innocents. They were not different from our own children.

Their lives were taken away at a very young age as
part of a military agenda, which claims to be combating “international
terrorism”, but instead creates terrorism.

The world is outraged when this happens in other nations, but where are the 'bleeding hearts' for these children, for all the children in Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Pakistan, Somalia, all the nations where drones have struck, where no one had a chance to escape?

These drone attacks are extremely precise. We are not dealing with “collateral damage”.Those who fly drones remotely have viewing screens, can see what they're striking, as is evident in the testimony and remorseful interviews several ex-operators have given."

<<This is a list of names of innocent children killed by America’s dronesBut behind each name there is the face of a child with a family history in a village in a far away country, with a mom and a dad, with brothers and sisters and friends.Among the list, are infants of 1, 2, 3 and 4 years old.In some cases brothers and sisters of an entire family are killed.Drone operators have the ability of viewing from a computer screen their targets well in advance of a strike. A family home is referred to as a “structure” or a “building” rather than a house. When they target a home with family members, they kill children. And they know that in advance of the drone strike.>>

THOSE LAST 5 WERE ALL FROM ONE FAMILY!THE PREVIOUS 4, ALSO ONE FAMILY!
THESE CHILDREN, THESE FAMILIES WERE NOT 'RADICAL JIHADISTS'!

BUT FOR WHATEVER REASON, THEIR LIVES WEREN'T WORTH A PLUG NICKEL

TO THE 'MAN ON THE STICK' FLYING THOSE DRONES...A STRIKE WAS CALLED AND A STRIKE IT WAS, NO MATTER WHAT SHOWED UP ON THAT SCREEN!

YOU CAN SAY THEY WERE JUST FOLLOWING ORDERS, AND THEY WERE, THAT'S TRUE, BUT WE HAVE DRONES OVER AMERICA NOW, DRONES IN OUR OWN SKIES...TELL ME THEY WERE JUST FOLLOWING ORDERS IF AN 'ACCIDENT' HAPPENS AND YOUR CHILDREN DIE, WHEN IT'S YOU TRYING TO SCRAPE UP ENOUGH OF THEIR REMAINS TO BURY THEM.

READ ALL THE NAMES!REMEMBER THEM!

STRIKES UNDER BUSH KILLED 69 ON ONE DAY IN OCTOBER 2006!176 CHILDREN DEAD IN JUST PAKISTAN SINCE 2001, THAT WE KNOW OF... 37 CHILDREN KILLED IN YEMEN.3 CHILDREN KILLED IN SOMALIA.ABOUT 5 CHILDREN ARE KILLEDEVERY DAYIN AFGHANISTAN, AND WE MAY NEVER KNOW HOW MANY CHILDREN HAVE DIED IN IRAQ SINCE WE INVADED THAT NATION. UNLIKE AT SANDY HOOK, WE HAVE PHOTOGRAPHIC EVIDENCE OF THE CARNAGE, OF THE DEAD BODIES. WE HAVE PHOTOS OF PARENTS, JUST LIKE MOST OF US, ACTUALLY WEEPING VISIBLE TEARS FOR THEIR CHILDREN, PARENTS TOO HORRIFIED TO DO ANYTHING BUT SCREAM. INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS SAY THE NUMBER OF DEAD CHILDREN ACROSS THE MIDDLE EAST, VICTIMS OF WAR, IS IN THE TENS OF THOUSANDS THERE!

AND WHY THE HELL ARE WE IN AFGHANISTAN? BECAUSE A RICH SAUDI ARABIAN CITIZEN WHO WAS KNOWN TO BE IN PAKISTAN WAS SAID TO HAVE GONE TO AFGHANISTAN...USAMA BIN LADEN.USAMA WAS DAMNED SURE NOT INSIDE THAT SCHOOL WHERE 69 KIDS DIED IN 2006. HE'D BEEN DEAD AT LEAST 5 YEARS, MAYBE 6 BY THEN!

SURE, AFTER IT'S OVER, WITH SMALL BODY PIECES LITTERING THE GROUND, SOME MAY EXPRESS REGRET, BUT NOTHING STOPS THEM LAUNCHING THE NEXT ATTACK!ONE SUCH INCIDENT WAS RECORDED IN WHICH THE DRONE OPERATOR CLEARLY SAW A CHILD IN HIS VIEWER BEFORE HE LAUNCHED THE STRIKE:“Did we just kill a kid?” he asked the man sitting next to him.“Yeah, I guess that was a kid,” the DRONE pilot replied. (The Woes of an American Drone Operator, Der Spiegel, December 14, 2012, A soldier sets out to graduate at the top of his class. He
succeeds, and he becomes a drone pilot working with a special unit of
the United States Air Force in New Mexico. He kills dozens of people.

Earlier this year, the London-based Bureau of Investigative Journalism found that drone attacks KILL an average of 4.8 children per day in Afghanistan ALONE, where earlier this year, a U.S. sergeant is reported to have killed 9 children. http://asiantribune.com/node/62242

95% OF ALL TARGETED KILLINGS BY THE U.S. IN THE TIME SINCE 9/11 HAVE BEEN CONDUCTED BY DRONES. DRONES DON'T PULL BACK WHEN CHILDREN ARE IN THE TARGET AREAS...THE OPERATOR JUST FIRES.

<<Contrary to assurances it has deployed U.S. drones only against known senior leaders of al-Qaida and allied groups, the Obama administration has targeted and killed hundreds of suspected lower-level Afghan, Pakistani and unidentified “other” militants in scores of strikes in Pakistan’s rugged tribal area, classified U.S. intelligence reports show.

The administration has said that strikes by the CIA’s missile-firing Predator and Reaper drones are authorized only against “specific senior operational leaders of al-Qaida and associated forces” involved in 9/11 who are plotting “imminent” violent attacks on Americans.

“It has to be a threat that is serious and not speculative,” President Obama said in a Sept. 6, 2012, interview with CNN. “It has to be a situation in which we can’t capture the individual before they move forward on some sort of operational plot against the United States.”

Copies of the top-secret U.S. intelligence reports, reviewed by McClatchy, however, show that drone strikes in Pakistan over four years didn’t adhere to those standards.

The intelligence reports list killings of alleged Afghan insurgents whose organization wasn’t on the U.S. list of terrorist groups at the time of the 9/11 strikes; of suspected members of a Pakistani extremist group that didn’t exist at the time of 9/11; and of unidentified individuals described as “other militants” and “foreign fighters.”...the findings indicate that the administration is “misleading the public about the scope of who can legitimately be targeted.”

The documents also show that drone operators weren’t always certain who they were killing despite the administration’s guarantees of the accuracy of the CIA’s targeting intelligence and its assertions that civilian casualties have been “exceedingly rare.”

The review of the intelligence documents is the first independent evaluation of internal U.S. intelligence accounting of drone attacks since the Bush administration launched America’s secret aerial warfare on Oct. 7, 2001, the day a missile-carrying Predator took off for Afghanistan from an airfield in Pakistan on the first operational flight of an armed U.S. drone.

The intelligence reports also indicate that:

At least 265 of up to 482 people whom the U.S. intelligence reports estimated the CIA killed a the year ended September 2011 were NOT senior al-Qaida leaders but instead were “assessed” as Afghan, Pakistani and unknown extremists. Drones killed only six top al Qaida leaders in ALL those months, according to news media accounts.

Forty-three of 95 drone strikes reviewed for that period hit groups OTHER THAN al-Qaida, including the Haqqani network, several Pakistani Taliban factions and unidentified individuals described only as “foreign fighters” and “other militants.”At other times, the CIA killed people who were only suspected, associated with or probably belonged to militant groups.

The administration has declined to reveal other details of the program, including the intelligence used to select targets and how much evidence is required for an individual to be placed on a CIA “kill list.” The administration also hasn’t acknowledged the existence of so-called signature strikes, let alone discussed the legal and procedural foundations of the attacks.>>

<<Since 2004, the US has been practicing in a new kind of clandestine military operation. The justification for using drones to take out enemy targets is appealing because it removes the risk of losing American military, it's much cheaper than deploying soldiers, it's politically much easier to maneuver (i.e. flying a drone within Pakistan vs. sending troops) and it keeps the world in the dark about what is actually happening. It takes the conflict out of sight, out of mind.

The success rate is extremely low and the cost on civilian lives and the general well-being of the population is very high.

This project helps to bring light on the topic of drones.
Not to speak for or against, but to inform and to allow you to see for yourself whether you can support drone usage or not.

Attacks and Victims View
The first view you see illustrates the attacks by the drones. We also wanted to give an emphasis on the victims. By clicking on the Victims link you can see an expanded view of the actual victims with the total number of attacks and fatalities for each month.

Important Notes
The category of victims we call “OTHER” is classified differently depending on the source. The Obama administration classifies any able-bodied male a military combatant unless evidence is brought forward to prove otherwise.
This is a very grey area for us.
These could be neighbors of a target killed.
They may all be militants and a threat.
What we do know for sure is that they are targeted without being given any representation or voice to defend themselves.>>

<<All of these strikes are occurring during a time when U.S. troops are thinning out their presence in Afghanistan and the war is winding down.

The incredible use of remotely-piloted drones mark a new way of fighting the war in Afghanistan as the forces left behind depend more and more on these weapons.
According to the military report, there was an average of 33 drone strikes per month in 2012, up from an average of 24.5 the year before.

Earlier this month, Congress held a rare hearing to address the use of unmanned drones as a means of killing, asking for transparency from the White House where the program is involved. According to the Huffington Post, Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) helmed the House Judiciary Committee demanding all confidential White House documents on drone strikes carried out.The measure was instantly dismissed.>>

INSTANTLY DISMISSED!THINK ABOUT THAT!HOW CAN ANYONE DISMISS THE LOSS OF INNOCENT LIVES WHEN SUCH A THING CAN BE PREVENTED AND SHOULD NEVER HAVE HAPPENED?

The Guardian’s George Monibot wrote in an editorial that while President Obama has shown his sorrow for the deaths of the 20 children killed in [the] massacre in Newtown, Connecticut, not a word has been spoken by the president over the children killed overseas by such drone strikes.

‘These children are just as important, just as real, just as deserving of the world's concern.Yet there are no presidential speeches or presidential tears for them, no pictures on the front pages of the world's newspapers, no interviews with grieving relatives, no minute analysis of what happened and why,’he writes.

<<The CIA ramped up secret drone strikes in Pakistan under President George W. Bush in 2008. Under Obama, they have expanded drastically there and in Yemen in 2011.

The CIA isn’t alone in conducting drone strikes.

The military has acknowledged “direct action” in Yemen and Somalia.
Strikes in those countries are reportedly carried out by the secretive, elite Joint Special Operations Command.

Since 9/11, JSOC has grown more than tenfold, taking on intelligence-gathering as well as combat roles.

The drone war is carried out remotely, from the U.S. and a network of secret bases around the world.

The Washington Post got a glimpse – through examining construction contracts and showing up uninvited – at the base in the tiny African nation of Djibouti from which many of the strikes on Yemen and Somalia are carried out.

Earlier this year, 'Wired' pieced together an account of the war against Somalia’s al-Shabaab militant group and the U.S.’s expanded military presence throughout Africa.

How are targets chosen?
The CIA and the military have reportedly long maintained overlapping “kill lists.” According to news reports last spring, the military’s list was hashed out in Pentagon-run interagency meetings, with the White House approving proposed targets. Obama would authorize particularly sensitive missions himself.

This year, the process reportedly changed, to concentrate the review of individuals and targeting criteria in the White House.
According to the Washington Post, the reviews now happen at regular inter-agency meetings at the National Counterterrorism Center. Recommendations are sent to a panel of National Security Council officials.

Final revisions go through White House counter-terror adviser John Brennan to the president. Several profiles have highlighted Brennan’s powerful and controversial role in shaping the trajectory of the targeted killing program. This week, Obama nominated Brennan to head the CIA.

At least some CIA strikes don’t have to get White House sign-off.
The director of the CIA can reportedly green-light strikes in Pakistan. In a 2011 interview, John Rizzo, previously the CIA’s top lawyer, said agency attorneys did an exhaustive review of each target.

According to the Washington Post, the Obama administration's recent effort to impose more stringent requirements for kill lists and signature strikes exempts the CIA's campaign in Pakistan. The CIA will have at least a year to continue strikes in Pakistan according to its own protocols.

Doesn’t the U.S. sometimes target people whose names they don’t know?Yes.
While administration officials often have frequently framed drone strikes as going after “high-level al Qaeda leaders who are planning attacks” against the U.S., many strikes go after apparent militants whose identities the U.S. doesn’t know.
The so-called “signature strikes” began under Bush in early 2008 and were expanded by Obama. Exactly what portion of strikes are signature strikes isn’t clear.

At various points the CIA’s use of signature strikes in Pakistan in particular have caused tensions with the White House and State Department.

One official told the New York Times about a joke that , for the CIA, “three guys doing jumping jacks” was a terrorist training camp.>>

<<In 2006, soldiers fired on a taxi that did not slow down at a military checkpoint in Iraq, killing a woman inside.
The military determined the checkpoint wasn't adequately marked, and her family received a "large" payment, of $7,500.

[LARGE? $7500 IS LARGE?]

"It's hard to digest that the value of a human life is a few thousand dollars," said Gordon-Bray, the general in Iraq. "But you know that in their economic situation, it is the equivalent of much more, and you feel better."

Today in Afghanistan, according to a Pentagon spokesman, condolence payments can be up to $5,000 for a death or injury, or $5,000 for property damage. Greater amounts can be approved in certain cases. In fiscal year 2012, the U.S. made 219 payments, totaling $891,000, according to a spokesman for U.S. forces in Afghanistan. (Solatia, the Army regulation on such payments, are not included in those figures.)

"The people we meet don't talk about the money so much as how they felt when they shook someone's hand, the recognition," said Erica Gaston, a senior program officer for the United States Institute for Peace, who works on Afghanistan issues.

According to Gaston and other advocates, it wasn't until 2008 that payments became commonplace among U.S. and coalition troops in Afghanistan, as part of a new emphasis on counterinsurgency.

"Under the law of war, you can kill civilians, as long as their deaths are proportional to immediate military gain," said Gary Solis, a professor at Georgetown Law. "
But as a nation, we recognize it's important to gain the trust of the people. As the complexion of war has changed, the significance of these payments has too." >>

WHAT IF WE "RECOGNIZED" THE SIGNIFICANCE OF NOT KILLING CHILDREN?WHAT IF WE "RECOGNIZED" THAT WE HAVE NO RIGHT TO BE IN THOSE NATIONS, PERIOD?WHAT IF WE "RECOGNIZED" THE RIGHT OF ALL NATIONSTO GOVERN AS THEIR CITIZENS AGREE TO BE GOVERNED? WHAT IF AMERICA SIMPLY GOT OUT OF ALL OTHER NATIONS AND LET THE ENTIRE WORLD DO AS WE DO...LIVE AS WE CHOOSE?IF ANY NATION INVADED AMERICA, ALL CITIZENS WOULD BE UP IN ARMS IMMEDIATELY AND DEATH WOULD COME FROM EVERY HOME IN THIS NATION, FROM ARMED CITIZENS WHO WOULD FIGHT INVADERS TO THEIR LAST BREATH.WHY ARE WE SHOCKED THAT THESE NATIONS WE'VE INVADED AND INDISCRIMINATELY KILLED IN HATE US?WHY DON'T WE UNDERSTAND THAT, IF WE WERE IN THEIR PLACE, WE'D HATE, TOO?WE MAY SOON GET OPPORTUNITIES TO SEE HOW IT FEELS TO BE TARGETED BY DRONES RIGHT HERE IN THE USA!

<<Air Force officials say a series of errors led to the crash of an unmanned drone aircraft in December in a remote area north of Las Vegas.

A report released Tuesday says the pilot didn't properly execute a preflight checklist before taking control of the drone, which stalled and crashed Dec. 5 in Douglas County near Mount Irish.

Nobody was injured in the crash, but the loss of the drone and artillery on board was estimated at $9.6 million.

Nellis Air Force Base officials say the MQ-9 Reaper aircraft was being used in an Air Force weapons school combat training mission. It was assigned to the 57th Wing at the base.>>

NOBODY WAS INJURED...THIS TIME...WHAT IF IT HAD BEEN ARMED?WHAT IF IT HAD "ACCIDENTALLY" CRASHED INTO A SCHOOL, A HOSPITAL, A BUSY CITY STREET?THE MILITARY IS TRAINING OPERATORS TO FLY THESE DRONES RIGHT HERE IN AMERICA.THEY ARE CURRENTLY BEING USED ALL ALONG THE MEXICAN-U.S. BORDER, THE CANADIAN BORDER, BOTH COASTS!WHAT IF IT HAD BEEN AFTER A "TARGET" WITHIN THE U.S.?

CONTRARY TO WHAT WE READ IN MAINSTREAM MEDIA MOST DAYS, OUR OWN STATES ARE SCRAMBLING TO GET DRONES!

<<Groups in 37 states are vying to become one of six federally designated sites for testing the remotely piloted crafts for use in the nation's airspace. They see a chance to generate jobs.

Although the prospect of drones flying over U.S. cities is generating cries of spies in the skies, groups from California to Florida are fiercely competing to become one of six federally designated sites for testing how the remotely piloted aircraft can safely be incorporated into the nation's airspace.

North Dakota boasts of its "minimal air traffic congestion." North Carolina, whose license plates read "First in Flight," cites its aviation history. California pitches its diverse geography: desert, mountains and ocean.

Technically, the designation itself offers no money, but 50 groups in 37 states have entered the Federal Aviation Administration competition. States see the designation as an opportunity to generate jobs from a burgeoning industry.SELLING-OUT CITIZENS TO GENERATE STATE INCOME
"Clearly, we wouldn't be interested unless we thought there was money," said Bob Knauff, a retired general leading a New York-Massachusetts bid.

And so the pitches keep coming. Oklahoma notes its experience in testing drones for the military. Arizona boasts of its nearly year-round "perfect flying weather." Florida, on the other hand, sees its sometimes severe weather a plus for testing drones in all kinds of conditions.

And the leader of a joint effort by Alaska, Hawaii and Oregon says, "We think we bring something to the table that is going to be hard to match," citing the diversity of environments and "massive amounts" of "relatively unpopulated airspace," especially up in the Last Frontier.

In Maryland, a group led by the University System of Maryland has proposed testing over the Chesapeake Bay, among other places. New York and Massachusetts propose testing over the Adirondacks and Cape Cod.

Some states hoping to be named test sites have combined forces, seeing strength in numbers. Virginia and New Jersey are working together.

In California, groups based in Ventura and Kern counties, with partners from throughout the state, are bidding to become test sites, but state officials worry the intrastate competition could hurt California's chances.>>

SO, WHEN YOU READ THAT STATES ARE PASSING LEGISLATION TO BAN DRONE FLIGHTS THERE, GO READ THAT "LEGISLATION". CHANCES ARE THERE ARE "AMENDMENTS" THAT ALLOW FOR...SHALL WE CALL IT "RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT"?

<<The deputy leader of al-Qaida in Yemen is calling on Saudis to revolt against the king, slamming the use of bases in Saudi Arabia to launch lethal U.S. drone strikes.

Saeed al-Shihri's audio recording appeared to back up al-Qaida denials that he was killed in a drone attack. Al-Shihri calls the Saudi royal family "the greatest agent of America."The Saudi national was reported killed by a U.S. drone strike earlier this year by Yemeni security officials, based on alleged Saudi intelligence.

In the recording, al-Shihri accuses the Saudi ruling family of betraying Muslims in the Arabian Peninsula. >>

AT LEAST ONE PERSON SEEMS TO KNOW WHO DRIVES THE "WAR", WHO WANTS ALL OTHER MUSLIMS OUT OF THE WAY IN THE MIDDLE EAST...SAUDI ARABIA, HOME TO THOSE "9/11 TERRORISTS" WHO SUPPOSEDLY HIJACKED PLANES AND FLEW THEM INTO AMERICAN TARGETS...BUT, 9 OF THOSE IDENTIFIED AS SUCH LATER TURNED UP ALIVE, ALIVE IN SAUDI ARABIA!HOW CAN WE EXPLAIN THAT?WE DON'T...SAUDI ARABIA, HOME OF BIN LADEN, AND HOUSE OF SAUD, WHICH WE KNOW FINANCES TERRORISM.

WE MUST STOP THESE DRONE ATTACKS, STOP THE KILLING OF BABIES, TODDLERS, TEENS, CIVILIANS CAUGHT UP IN THIS STUPID WAR ON NOTHING, ON NO ONE...EXCEPT THOSE WE ONCE CALLED "HEROES" AND "FREEDOM FIGHTERS", THE 'TALIBAN' THAT REAGAN LOVED, THAT ALL AMERICA SAW AS HEROES JUST 30 SHORT YEARS AGO. WE MUST STOP BEING AFRAID OF CIA-CREATED "BOOGEY-MONSTERS", OF DHS-CREATED AND FBI-CREATED "TERRORISTS" AND JUST BRING OUR ARMIES HOME!WHEN IT BECOMES A WAR ON CHILDREN, WHEN WE DAILY TAKE INNOCENT YOUNG LIVES IN ACTS OF MURDER AND THEN IGNORE THEIR DEATHS, IT IS FAR BEYOND TIME TO STOP IT, TO END THE MADNESS...ONCE AND FOR ALL!REMEMBER THE CHILDREN!http://www.policymic.com/articles/20884/is-america-like-adam-lanza-u-s-drone-strikes-have-killed-176-children-in-pakistan-alone

<<Here, we worry that our children might be afraid to go to school because there is now a 1 in 67,140 chance that their elementary school might be attacked.

But we cause that same fear when we allow our government to fire missiles at schools abroad.Sadaullah Khan, a 15-year old boy who lost both legs in a drone strike says, "I used to go to school … I thought I would become a doctor. After the drone strikes, I stopped going to school."

Here in the U.S., parents worry that they might have to attend the
funeral of their own child.
But our government strikes fear into the
hearts of parents abroad when it kills their children during funerals.
When we worry about the safety of our children, we forget that it is ourdrone strikes, ourmoney and ourdemocratically-elected government that cause the same fear in select countries around the world.

And yet, Americans are going to spend thousands of hours supporting
or protesting various gun laws to "save the children," here at home.

But
in reality, Americans could save many more children if they protested
our own government's killing of hundreds of children abroad.
Americans won't spend their time this way, even if it would save more
children's lives.
It seems that Americans should care when any child is murdered, not just when American ones are.>>

REMEMBER THEM!

AND DEMAND THIS STOPS!

IF THESE WERE AMERICAN CHILDREN, WHAT WOULD YOU DO TO MAKE IT STOP, TO BRING THOSE RESPONSIBLE TO JUSTICE?